Hold on a sec. If the protocol permits it, then it is fine. Who are you to say the implementation is irresponsible? This makes you censoring fascists like a random "democratic" fearmongering government. Thoughts?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

If your wallet channels get force-closed and charged on-chain fees (in a high fee environment) for zaping someone 10 sats it's sort of irresponsible to leave the feature on, at least for now, it seems

Blocking specifik addresses or invoices for payments is still a distructive solution. If they do not like the channel treatment, they can set channel engagement rules or even force close specific channels themselves. That is a proof of work solution.

The claim against LND reminds me of early 2000s and microsoft trying to take over javascript rather than trying to find consensus. Browsers were a mess back then.